The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Non-Citizen Voting, Primary Edition
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The GSS suggests it occurs. So does the Cooperative Congressional Election Study of 2016, which surveyed 38,465 people who reported voting in a presidential primary during the last election cycle. Of those, 259 were classified as non-citizen immigrants. That comes to 0.7% of the active primary electorate. The party distribution of their primary/caucus party participation:

This isn’t enough to materially affect the outcomes of the vast majority of state elections. Assuming a similar general election preference distribution, using this data we can reasonably estimate that non-citizen voting potentially nets the Democrat candidate about 0.5 points over the Republican candidate. In 2016, the only state that would’ve flipped was New Hampshire. Hillary Clinton won the state by 0.37% of the vote. New Hampshire is less foreign-born than the country as a whole, though, so it may not have even amounted to enough to change the outcome in the Free State.

On the other hand, it’s not nothing, and any individual citizen has the right to be upset by the idea that someone who shouldn’t be casting a ballot could be cancelling out his constitutionally legitimate vote.

Parenthetically, American Samoans are legally American nationals. They are not citizens like the native born residents of the other American territories are. The population of American Samoa comprises less than 0.002% of the empire’s total, however, so unless they are oversampled by a factor of 350 here, they don’t account for the non-citizen vote!

CCES variables used: IMMSTAT, CC16_328

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology • Tags: Election 2020, Voting Rights 
Hide 36 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Blue Alien Pac-Man is eating our republic.

  2. We are talking about the political party primaries here, not the general election for President, Reps, and Senators, as specified by the Constitution. I really don’t see any problem with this (and you all ought to know by now, I’m an anti-immigration-invasion fanatic).

    After all, there used to be guys in smoke-filled rooms, and silly straw polls with all kinds of rules, that decided who would be the candidate. It was only a few years ago that I realized “hey, this stuff is run like a Federal election, yet it’s not.” When did it become run by the same organizations that run the real voting? I say that because primary votes are a party function, which are entities not even mentioned in the Constitution (the Founders found political parties an anathema, but they came into being pretty quickly anyway). These elections shouldn’t even be run with our tax money. The R’s and D’s and whomever else ought to pay for it.

    If the R’s want to limit voting to only men with property, can they not legally do that? The D’s can let Jose, Hose-B, and 32 flavors of gender and specie vote for all I care. The Constitutional amendments XIV, XIX, and XXVI do not apply.

    • Replies: @Barack Obama's secret Unz account
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Are you not letting a narrow focus on legalism blind you to a problem here? All other things being equal, immigrants voting in primaries is going to push either party's candidates in the policy directions favoured by immigrants. Even if they're prevented from voting in the general election, they will still have had an impact upon it.

    This is all closing the barn door after the horse has bolted, of course: millions of immigrants are going to make their presence felt, politically, even if they're prevented from doing so formally. (Which doesn't mean that it wouldn't be worth the effort to at least prevent them from doing so formally.)

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Louis Renault
    @Achmed E. Newman

    They would never illegally vote in a general election, and having an impact on local elections where the primary is effectively the election, lets not talk about that either.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The fact that the data happens to come from a survey about primary elections is probably a red herring. The issue is the extent to which non-citizens are systematically casting illegal votes -- and doing so in favor of Democrats.

    If .7% is the number of survey respondents who actually admit to casting an illegal vote, I'd wager the real number is a good bit higher. Suppose half of illegal foreign voters decline to fess up on the survey. And suppose foreigners are also twice as likely to vote in the general as opposed to primary elections, which doesn't seem implausible since primaries tend to low-turnout affairs dominated by long-term local voters and professional politicos.

    It could be the real number of illegal foreign voters in the presidential/general election might be more like 3%. With a 75% Dem skew, that could add a 2+% margin to Dem. vote totals, which could easily swing a key state somewhere and/or make the difference in who wins the popular vote.

  3. As a prior commenter from your GSS posts notes, it’s not just voting. There are an estimated 30 seats in The House that only exist because illegals count when it comes to tabulating population for representation

  4. I believe the real electoral issue with illegal aliens is not their direct votes cast, but the fact that they load up the Electoral College weighting in states that are already reliably blue. This would cause a significant Democratic rip current in the election even if not a single one of the illegals voted.

    • Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @Intelligent Dasein

    There's lots of issues.

    "I believe the real electoral issue with illegal aliens..."

    Well, the "electoral" issue is certainly one of the issues.

    But one of them is existential: it is the demoralizing, degrading effect of a toxic insult to the body politic. What on earth are these people doing here? Why is their presence being tolerated? What sort of traitors are undergirding the means by which they are tolerated? What does this say about the health of the system? It's bad enough that they are "alien," under any category... But illegally present, into the bargain?

    Imagine if, in the black days of 1942, boat loads of Nazi German nationals and Imperial Japanese nationals were sneaking ashore and, mirabile dictu, managing to vote.

    The argument that, "Well, it was only 5,000 of them, so it's OK, not a bother" would be met with scorn by any self-respecting patriot. The real argument would be, "F!CKING NAZIS ARE VOTING IN OUR ELECTIONS!!"

    The mere fact that these plump brown diabetic naco-speaking cretins are not Nazis is sort of an incidental, it is beside the point.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Yes, I'd written about this before long ago on Peak Stupidity - here. I was referring not to the primaries, but the general elections. You are quite right that this is the problem. To get all legal-eagle Constitutionalist on you all again, the Constitution unfortunately does not specify citizenship for being counted in the 10-year census. (This was something President Trump was trying to push through, if you all recall, as it's not a Constitutional limit either way. This effort failed to get through the channels, but I think Trump tried his best on this one.)

    Anyway, that is a very good point, I.D., that applies to the General, Constitutionally-specified elections.

  5. @Achmed E. Newman
    We are talking about the political party primaries here, not the general election for President, Reps, and Senators, as specified by the Constitution. I really don't see any problem with this (and you all ought to know by now, I'm an anti-immigration-invasion fanatic).

    After all, there used to be guys in smoke-filled rooms, and silly straw polls with all kinds of rules, that decided who would be the candidate. It was only a few years ago that I realized "hey, this stuff is run like a Federal election, yet it's not." When did it become run by the same organizations that run the real voting? I say that because primary votes are a party function, which are entities not even mentioned in the Constitution (the Founders found political parties an anathema, but they came into being pretty quickly anyway). These elections shouldn't even be run with our tax money. The R's and D's and whomever else ought to pay for it.

    If the R's want to limit voting to only men with property, can they not legally do that? The D's can let Jose, Hose-B, and 32 flavors of gender and specie vote for all I care. The Constitutional amendments XIV, XIX, and XXVI do not apply.

    Replies: @Barack Obama's secret Unz account, @Louis Renault, @Hypnotoad666

    Are you not letting a narrow focus on legalism blind you to a problem here? All other things being equal, immigrants voting in primaries is going to push either party’s candidates in the policy directions favoured by immigrants. Even if they’re prevented from voting in the general election, they will still have had an impact upon it.

    This is all closing the barn door after the horse has bolted, of course: millions of immigrants are going to make their presence felt, politically, even if they’re prevented from doing so formally. (Which doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t be worth the effort to at least prevent them from doing so formally.)

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    I agree totally with your position, BOsUA, but again, it's up to the R-squad and the D-squad of The Party to control these elections. Were the GOP really on our side on this issue, the barn door would have been shut long ago, but they don't, so of course they don't give a dang who votes in their primaries either.

    How about a real conservative party that goes back to only men with property (on a list they can draw up) can vote for the candidate? Or, go back to the smoke-filled rooms, which can't be any worse than the shitshow of a presidential selection that we are supposed to be entertained with ever 4 years.

  6. Yes, if I was an illeg- *cough* non-citizen immigrant I would definitely 1) respond to a survey and 2) say that I had voted illegal- *cough* in a non-citizen manner.

    • Agree: ic1000, Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @BlackC

    There are scores of illegal aliens who are completely open about their status. Nobody gets deported if they haven't committed a serious crime.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  7. @Intelligent Dasein
    I believe the real electoral issue with illegal aliens is not their direct votes cast, but the fact that they load up the Electoral College weighting in states that are already reliably blue. This would cause a significant Democratic rip current in the election even if not a single one of the illegals voted.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @Achmed E. Newman

    There’s lots of issues.

    “I believe the real electoral issue with illegal aliens…”

    Well, the “electoral” issue is certainly one of the issues.

    But one of them is existential: it is the demoralizing, degrading effect of a toxic insult to the body politic. What on earth are these people doing here? Why is their presence being tolerated? What sort of traitors are undergirding the means by which they are tolerated? What does this say about the health of the system? It’s bad enough that they are “alien,” under any category… But illegally present, into the bargain?

    Imagine if, in the black days of 1942, boat loads of Nazi German nationals and Imperial Japanese nationals were sneaking ashore and, mirabile dictu, managing to vote.

    The argument that, “Well, it was only 5,000 of them, so it’s OK, not a bother” would be met with scorn by any self-respecting patriot. The real argument would be, “F!CKING NAZIS ARE VOTING IN OUR ELECTIONS!!”

    The mere fact that these plump brown diabetic naco-speaking cretins are not Nazis is sort of an incidental, it is beside the point.

  8. Voting in the USA is a joke. If it were done rationally, we would either have a system where citizens were required to vote and votes were tracked carefully, or we would have a system in which qualifications such literacy or issue-familiarity tests were in place and votes were tracked carefully, or we making voting dependent on something like tax contribution or military service. The current system of allowing people to vote or not as per their whim without keeping track of who voted is designed to maximize the amount of corruption and partisan feeling that the uniparty can generate.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @Chrisnonymous

    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

    If the criminals in the political system can't field a candidate better than nothing, then the citizenry would be better off with nothing. The fact that it would totally screw up the machinery of gov't is a bonus.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes

    , @dfordoom
    @Chrisnonymous


    or we would have a system in which qualifications such literacy or issue-familiarity tests were in place and votes were tracked carefully, or we making voting dependent on something like tax contribution or military service.
     
    Dissident rightists are in love with ideas like this. They really like the idea of a voting system that would disenfranchise Democrat voters.

    These ideas are complete non-starters politically. They're an example of how out of touch with reality many dissident rightists are. They're pure fantasy.
  9. Isn’t it unfair that Mexican non-citizens can vote more easily than, say, Iraqi non-citizens?

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  10. @Achmed E. Newman
    We are talking about the political party primaries here, not the general election for President, Reps, and Senators, as specified by the Constitution. I really don't see any problem with this (and you all ought to know by now, I'm an anti-immigration-invasion fanatic).

    After all, there used to be guys in smoke-filled rooms, and silly straw polls with all kinds of rules, that decided who would be the candidate. It was only a few years ago that I realized "hey, this stuff is run like a Federal election, yet it's not." When did it become run by the same organizations that run the real voting? I say that because primary votes are a party function, which are entities not even mentioned in the Constitution (the Founders found political parties an anathema, but they came into being pretty quickly anyway). These elections shouldn't even be run with our tax money. The R's and D's and whomever else ought to pay for it.

    If the R's want to limit voting to only men with property, can they not legally do that? The D's can let Jose, Hose-B, and 32 flavors of gender and specie vote for all I care. The Constitutional amendments XIV, XIX, and XXVI do not apply.

    Replies: @Barack Obama's secret Unz account, @Louis Renault, @Hypnotoad666

    They would never illegally vote in a general election, and having an impact on local elections where the primary is effectively the election, lets not talk about that either.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Louis Renault

    Sure, they'd do the same in a general election. Hell of a lot of difference that matters in California, where it IS a one-party State and they have been encouraging that sort of thing for decades. Nobody cares. OK, Conservatives care, but what's supposedly their Party doesn't do anything serious to stop it.

    Just get it straight, OK? The primary's are not Federal elections. Yes, the process for all the elections has been corrupted by motor-voter laws, absentee ballots for anyone (in some State), graveyard polling stations, etc. I think all 30,000,000 or so illegal aliens need to be sent home, so this will not be (the least of, IMO) our problems.

    If you make your own political party, Mr. Renault, say a real opposition party to The Party with the 2 squads that there is now, you have every right to limit the voting to whomever you and the other organizers please. Don't worry if people will be SHOCKED, SHOCKED, I tells ya. F 'em.

  11. These are the ones who admit to it—and you have to think that most illegals know without question that they’re not allowed to vote.

    • Replies: @A123
    @edkpyros


    These are the ones who admit to it—and you have to think that most illegals know without question that they’re not allowed to vote.
     
    The issue is more about legal migrants (e.g. Green Cards) rather than true illegals.

    Due to "Motor Voter" legislation, sometimes non-citizens receive a Voter Registration Card and in Good Faith believe that they are allowed to vote.

    Registration needs to return to a "Proof of Citizenship" standard, but the judiciary is not there yet. With 4 more years of Trump appointments, the federal bench will be much more aligned to reality.

    There is substantial potential for improvement after Biden's inevitable humiliating defeat.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  12. Amnesty for all illegal women, after we deport an equivalent number of white liberals

    The future of immigration must be female!

  13. @Barack Obama's secret Unz account
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Are you not letting a narrow focus on legalism blind you to a problem here? All other things being equal, immigrants voting in primaries is going to push either party's candidates in the policy directions favoured by immigrants. Even if they're prevented from voting in the general election, they will still have had an impact upon it.

    This is all closing the barn door after the horse has bolted, of course: millions of immigrants are going to make their presence felt, politically, even if they're prevented from doing so formally. (Which doesn't mean that it wouldn't be worth the effort to at least prevent them from doing so formally.)

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I agree totally with your position, BOsUA, but again, it’s up to the R-squad and the D-squad of The Party to control these elections. Were the GOP really on our side on this issue, the barn door would have been shut long ago, but they don’t, so of course they don’t give a dang who votes in their primaries either.

    How about a real conservative party that goes back to only men with property (on a list they can draw up) can vote for the candidate? Or, go back to the smoke-filled rooms, which can’t be any worse than the shitshow of a presidential selection that we are supposed to be entertained with ever 4 years.

  14. @Intelligent Dasein
    I believe the real electoral issue with illegal aliens is not their direct votes cast, but the fact that they load up the Electoral College weighting in states that are already reliably blue. This would cause a significant Democratic rip current in the election even if not a single one of the illegals voted.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease, @Achmed E. Newman

    Yes, I’d written about this before long ago on Peak Stupidityhere. I was referring not to the primaries, but the general elections. You are quite right that this is the problem. To get all legal-eagle Constitutionalist on you all again, the Constitution unfortunately does not specify citizenship for being counted in the 10-year census. (This was something President Trump was trying to push through, if you all recall, as it’s not a Constitutional limit either way. This effort failed to get through the channels, but I think Trump tried his best on this one.)

    Anyway, that is a very good point, I.D., that applies to the General, Constitutionally-specified elections.

  15. Mr Epigone says:

    On the other hand, it’s not nothing, and any individual citizen has the right to be upset by the idea that someone who shouldn’t be casting a ballot could be cancelling out his constitutionally legitimate vote.

    I say:

    LEGITIMACY of government at all levels is absent and therefore all government debt must be abolished. Declare a debt jubilee and repay all student loan debt plus 6 percent a year added on for opportunity costs lost to student debt. Reagan and Bushy Boy #2 and Baby Boomer slob Billy Clinton and the evil bankers cooked up the student loan debt scam as a way to create more debt and to spread out the swag to the crooked crooks in academia.

    I wrote this in November of 2019 about non-citizen voting:

    Non-citizen voting could be an excellent issue, among dozens of others, for young people to use as an example of why the legitimacy of government at all levels has been obliterated, and that legitimacy obliteration renders all government debts, at all levels, to be considered legally as ODIOUS DEBT.

    I like sovereign debt secessionism, but you would need to have massive repetitive propaganda to make that stick in the brains of the average boob. Young people would instinctively understand the valid reasoning for refusing to pay government debt when the government, at all levels, has refused to make sure that the voting process and voting procedures ensure that only eligible voters participate in American democracy.

    To repeat from a previous comment, non-citizen voting is an excellent way to explain to the public just how many tens of millions of illegal aliens and legal aliens are in the USA. Cheap labor foreigner visas and student foreigner visas and illegal alien invaders and tourist foreigner visas and all manner of other schemes that the government uses to flood the USA with foreigners.

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/non-citizen-voting/#comment-3563083

  16. Mr Epigone says:

    On the other hand, it’s not nothing, and any individual citizen has the right to be upset by the idea that someone who shouldn’t be casting a ballot could be cancelling out his constitutionally legitimate vote.

    I say:

    Teddy Cruz pushes mass legal immigration and Teddy Cruz refuses to call for the immediate deportation of all illegal alien invaders and Teddy Cruz wants to flood more visa foreigners into the USA and Teddy Cruz wants to flood the USA with foreigners of every kind.

    Teddy Cruz is turning Texas into a Democrat Party state by means of mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration.

    Teddy Cruz is directly responsible for creating the conditions whereby non-citizens and foreigners are outvoting the White Core American ancestral core of the USA.

    Teddy Cruz is a cheap bastard who won’t support the Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP).

    The Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) will pay each American who has all blood ancestry born in colonial America or the USA before 1924 a cool ten thousand dollars a month. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank shall work together to conjure up the cash out of thin air, just like the ruling class is doing now.

  17. In the Failed State of Amerikastan, you need a license to fish, but not vote.

    How much longer can the bleeding go on?

    Its morally and fiscally bankrupt now.

    Trump was trying to save the System.

    The System was too dumb and corrupt to let him save them.

  18. Congratulations!

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Haha, thanks, though salvaging my powers of prognostication may not turn out to have been... worth it in the scheme of things!

    One thing important to remember--Harris is owned by Silicon Valley. She outraised the rest of the Democrat primary among the tech giants. That's going to get lost in the discussion about her being a "cop", having slept her way up the chain, the clips of her attacking Biden during the debates, etc. But Big Tech knows they can rig this election forty ways from Sunday and as long as Biden wins, it'll be consequence-free election interference.

    Replies: @iffen

  19. The Russians/Belarussians/people of the world are lucky this happened before the US election, as I have no doubt that the US will flip back towards concentrating on Russia at that point.

  20. @edkpyros
    These are the ones who admit to it—and you have to think that most illegals know without question that they're not allowed to vote.

    Replies: @A123

    These are the ones who admit to it—and you have to think that most illegals know without question that they’re not allowed to vote.

    The issue is more about legal migrants (e.g. Green Cards) rather than true illegals.

    Due to “Motor Voter” legislation, sometimes non-citizens receive a Voter Registration Card and in Good Faith believe that they are allowed to vote.

    Registration needs to return to a “Proof of Citizenship” standard, but the judiciary is not there yet. With 4 more years of Trump appointments, the federal bench will be much more aligned to reality.

    There is substantial potential for improvement after Biden’s inevitable humiliating defeat.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @A123

    I could have easily voted in 2 States for a few year period. I was registered in both. However, I just voted in one of them. That was not because I'm the most upright straight-arrow around, but it was a matter of transportation.

  21. @Chrisnonymous
    Voting in the USA is a joke. If it were done rationally, we would either have a system where citizens were required to vote and votes were tracked carefully, or we would have a system in which qualifications such literacy or issue-familiarity tests were in place and votes were tracked carefully, or we making voting dependent on something like tax contribution or military service. The current system of allowing people to vote or not as per their whim without keeping track of who voted is designed to maximize the amount of corruption and partisan feeling that the uniparty can generate.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

    If the criminals in the political system can’t field a candidate better than nothing, then the citizenry would be better off with nothing. The fact that it would totally screw up the machinery of gov’t is a bonus.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    @RoatanBill


    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

     

    The second sentence is where the problem arises.

    There are jurisdictions in the US where some elections do have NOTA (or its equivalent) on the ballot.

    NOTA has won on occasion - e.g., a 1976 Nevada Republican primary, and the 2014 Democratic gubernatorial primary in the same state. All that happens is the next-in-line is declared the winner.

    The fuckbags of the political class will never - so long as their arse points to the ground - permit the peons to say "We don't need any of you" and make it stick.

    If they permitted it to happen, the peons would discover that having an empty political position is objectively better than having the position occupied by the type of parasitic shitbag who is attracted to politics.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

  22. @Louis Renault
    @Achmed E. Newman

    They would never illegally vote in a general election, and having an impact on local elections where the primary is effectively the election, lets not talk about that either.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Sure, they’d do the same in a general election. Hell of a lot of difference that matters in California, where it IS a one-party State and they have been encouraging that sort of thing for decades. Nobody cares. OK, Conservatives care, but what’s supposedly their Party doesn’t do anything serious to stop it.

    Just get it straight, OK? The primary’s are not Federal elections. Yes, the process for all the elections has been corrupted by motor-voter laws, absentee ballots for anyone (in some State), graveyard polling stations, etc. I think all 30,000,000 or so illegal aliens need to be sent home, so this will not be (the least of, IMO) our problems.

    If you make your own political party, Mr. Renault, say a real opposition party to The Party with the 2 squads that there is now, you have every right to limit the voting to whomever you and the other organizers please. Don’t worry if people will be SHOCKED, SHOCKED, I tells ya. F ’em.

  23. @A123
    @edkpyros


    These are the ones who admit to it—and you have to think that most illegals know without question that they’re not allowed to vote.
     
    The issue is more about legal migrants (e.g. Green Cards) rather than true illegals.

    Due to "Motor Voter" legislation, sometimes non-citizens receive a Voter Registration Card and in Good Faith believe that they are allowed to vote.

    Registration needs to return to a "Proof of Citizenship" standard, but the judiciary is not there yet. With 4 more years of Trump appointments, the federal bench will be much more aligned to reality.

    There is substantial potential for improvement after Biden's inevitable humiliating defeat.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I could have easily voted in 2 States for a few year period. I was registered in both. However, I just voted in one of them. That was not because I’m the most upright straight-arrow around, but it was a matter of transportation.

  24. @BlackC
    Yes, if I was an illeg- *cough* non-citizen immigrant I would definitely 1) respond to a survey and 2) say that I had voted illegal- *cough* in a non-citizen manner.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    There are scores of illegal aliens who are completely open about their status. Nobody gets deported if they haven’t committed a serious crime.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Audacious Epigone

    But, but, but.. A.E., I thought they were all living in the shadows? Oh, they meant the shadow on the west side of Home Depot in the morning.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

  25. @Audacious Epigone
    @BlackC

    There are scores of illegal aliens who are completely open about their status. Nobody gets deported if they haven't committed a serious crime.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    But, but, but.. A.E., I thought they were all living in the shadows? Oh, they meant the shadow on the west side of Home Depot in the morning.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Achmed E. Newman

    In California, they are being put into official positions of political power. The idea that they are living in the shadows is a joke. We're the ones living in the shadows, not them.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  26. @Anatoly Karlin
    Congratulations!

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Haha, thanks, though salvaging my powers of prognostication may not turn out to have been… worth it in the scheme of things!

    One thing important to remember–Harris is owned by Silicon Valley. She outraised the rest of the Democrat primary among the tech giants. That’s going to get lost in the discussion about her being a “cop”, having slept her way up the chain, the clips of her attacking Biden during the debates, etc. But Big Tech knows they can rig this election forty ways from Sunday and as long as Biden wins, it’ll be consequence-free election interference.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Audacious Epigone

    Black voters emphatically rejected Harris as a nominee for president, maybe that will spill over into lack of enthusiasm for her as vice-president.

  27. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Audacious Epigone

    But, but, but.. A.E., I thought they were all living in the shadows? Oh, they meant the shadow on the west side of Home Depot in the morning.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    In California, they are being put into official positions of political power. The idea that they are living in the shadows is a joke. We’re the ones living in the shadows, not them.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Audacious Epigone

    I was being sarcastic. I can't tell if you know that. (OK, I haven't posted so much lately so ...)

    Anyway, assuming you know that, yes, I'd like anyone who says Trump is playing 4-D chess (hell, even 2-D checkers) or cannot get things done because of "judges, bureaucrats" to explain why I.C.E. can't show up at the next La Raza rally and detain any illegals.

    That reminds me, do you remember, A.E., when a known illegal alien was in attendance at the State of the Union address? Everyone knew this. This was perhaps the first one, so couldn't Trump have had the guy arrested? It'd have been mostly symbolic, but that would have gotten him 5 million new voters!

    Replies: @A123

  28. @Audacious Epigone
    @Achmed E. Newman

    In California, they are being put into official positions of political power. The idea that they are living in the shadows is a joke. We're the ones living in the shadows, not them.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I was being sarcastic. I can’t tell if you know that. (OK, I haven’t posted so much lately so …)

    Anyway, assuming you know that, yes, I’d like anyone who says Trump is playing 4-D chess (hell, even 2-D checkers) or cannot get things done because of “judges, bureaucrats” to explain why I.C.E. can’t show up at the next La Raza rally and detain any illegals.

    That reminds me, do you remember, A.E., when a known illegal alien was in attendance at the State of the Union address? Everyone knew this. This was perhaps the first one, so couldn’t Trump have had the guy arrested? It’d have been mostly symbolic, but that would have gotten him 5 million new voters!

    • Replies: @A123
    @Achmed E. Newman


    That reminds me, do you remember, A.E., when a known illegal alien was in attendance at the State of the Union address? Everyone knew this. This was perhaps the first one, so couldn’t Trump have had the guy arrested? It’d have been mostly symbolic, but that would have gotten him 5 million new voters!
     
    It is a fun concept.

    However, concepts need to be looked at for contingencies before being put into motion as a plan:

    -- What happens if a Democratic Senator interferes with the arrest?
    -- What happens if the police shoot, possibly kill, that Senator?

    Can you imagine how bad it would be if Trump handed the Fake Stream Media a story that could be twisted into "Trump Ordered Murder of Senator"?

    I'd like anyone who says Trump is playing 4-D chess (hell, even 2-D checkers) or cannot get things done because of “judges, bureaucrats” to explain why I.C.E. can’t show up at the next La Raza rally and detain any illegals.
     
    There are leakers in almost every agency who are loyal to the SJW Globalists.

    How many people would be involved in your hypothetical La Raza raid?
    -- How will you prevent leaks?

    How are you going to transport that many officers?
    -- What happens if the transport fleet is spotted by the media and broadcast live?

    Are you going to included local law enforcement in the plan?
    -- If yes, that is another set of potential leakers.
    -- If no, what happens if a surprised & panicked local cop shoots a federal officer? Or, misses and the stray bullet hits a child?

    Voluntarily initiating a physical confrontation as 1st choice creates huge downside risks that cannot be well controlled.
    _____

    How does Trump use 5-D chess to beat the SJW's? He crushes them with their own words.

    https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1291892667689902081?s=20

    By creating engagements with no possible down side, he forces the enemy to compete on the battlefield of his choice. They are defeated before they can make their first move.
    ____

    Trump just passed WUHAN-19 benefits by Executive Order:

    -- Will the DNC sue to block aid to voters less than 90 days before an election?
    -- Or, will the DNC let Trump take 100% credit for going around them to provide relief to swing voters?

    In political terms, Trump rigged the engagement so the enemy has no winning options.

    PEACE 😇
    .
    https://www.askideas.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/The-best-victory-is-when-the-opponent-surrenders-of-its-own-accord-before-there-are-any-actual-hostilities...It-is-best-to-win-without-fighting.-Sun-Tzu.jpg
  29. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Audacious Epigone

    I was being sarcastic. I can't tell if you know that. (OK, I haven't posted so much lately so ...)

    Anyway, assuming you know that, yes, I'd like anyone who says Trump is playing 4-D chess (hell, even 2-D checkers) or cannot get things done because of "judges, bureaucrats" to explain why I.C.E. can't show up at the next La Raza rally and detain any illegals.

    That reminds me, do you remember, A.E., when a known illegal alien was in attendance at the State of the Union address? Everyone knew this. This was perhaps the first one, so couldn't Trump have had the guy arrested? It'd have been mostly symbolic, but that would have gotten him 5 million new voters!

    Replies: @A123

    That reminds me, do you remember, A.E., when a known illegal alien was in attendance at the State of the Union address? Everyone knew this. This was perhaps the first one, so couldn’t Trump have had the guy arrested? It’d have been mostly symbolic, but that would have gotten him 5 million new voters!

    It is a fun concept.

    However, concepts need to be looked at for contingencies before being put into motion as a plan:

    — What happens if a Democratic Senator interferes with the arrest?
    — What happens if the police shoot, possibly kill, that Senator?

    Can you imagine how bad it would be if Trump handed the Fake Stream Media a story that could be twisted into “Trump Ordered Murder of Senator”?

    I’d like anyone who says Trump is playing 4-D chess (hell, even 2-D checkers) or cannot get things done because of “judges, bureaucrats” to explain why I.C.E. can’t show up at the next La Raza rally and detain any illegals.

    There are leakers in almost every agency who are loyal to the SJW Globalists.

    How many people would be involved in your hypothetical La Raza raid?
    — How will you prevent leaks?

    How are you going to transport that many officers?
    — What happens if the transport fleet is spotted by the media and broadcast live?

    Are you going to included local law enforcement in the plan?
    — If yes, that is another set of potential leakers.
    — If no, what happens if a surprised & panicked local cop shoots a federal officer? Or, misses and the stray bullet hits a child?

    Voluntarily initiating a physical confrontation as 1st choice creates huge downside risks that cannot be well controlled.
    _____

    How does Trump use 5-D chess to beat the SJW’s? He crushes them with their own words.

    By creating engagements with no possible down side, he forces the enemy to compete on the battlefield of his choice. They are defeated before they can make their first move.
    ____

    Trump just passed WUHAN-19 benefits by Executive Order:

    — Will the DNC sue to block aid to voters less than 90 days before an election?
    — Or, will the DNC let Trump take 100% credit for going around them to provide relief to swing voters?

    In political terms, Trump rigged the engagement so the enemy has no winning options.

    PEACE 😇
    .

  30. @Chrisnonymous
    Voting in the USA is a joke. If it were done rationally, we would either have a system where citizens were required to vote and votes were tracked carefully, or we would have a system in which qualifications such literacy or issue-familiarity tests were in place and votes were tracked carefully, or we making voting dependent on something like tax contribution or military service. The current system of allowing people to vote or not as per their whim without keeping track of who voted is designed to maximize the amount of corruption and partisan feeling that the uniparty can generate.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    or we would have a system in which qualifications such literacy or issue-familiarity tests were in place and votes were tracked carefully, or we making voting dependent on something like tax contribution or military service.

    Dissident rightists are in love with ideas like this. They really like the idea of a voting system that would disenfranchise Democrat voters.

    These ideas are complete non-starters politically. They’re an example of how out of touch with reality many dissident rightists are. They’re pure fantasy.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
  31. @RoatanBill
    @Chrisnonymous

    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

    If the criminals in the political system can't field a candidate better than nothing, then the citizenry would be better off with nothing. The fact that it would totally screw up the machinery of gov't is a bonus.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes

    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

    The second sentence is where the problem arises.

    There are jurisdictions in the US where some elections do have NOTA (or its equivalent) on the ballot.

    NOTA has won on occasion – e.g., a 1976 Nevada Republican primary, and the 2014 Democratic gubernatorial primary in the same state. All that happens is the next-in-line is declared the winner.

    The fuckbags of the political class will never – so long as their arse points to the ground – permit the peons to say “We don’t need any of you” and make it stick.

    If they permitted it to happen, the peons would discover that having an empty political position is objectively better than having the position occupied by the type of parasitic shitbag who is attracted to politics.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @Kratoklastes

    If there are jurisdictions that have a NOTA on the ballot and that crystal clear will of the voters is ignored with the 2nd place POS getting the nod, then what does that say about the sanctity of the voting process?

    And some people insist on voting. All they're doing is reinforcing a corrupt system; corrupt to the bone.

    Don't vote. It encourages bad behavior.

    Let's see if we can drive down the percentage of the voting population to single digits and then watch as the political class tries to make any election a mandate for their always asinine policies. The low rate in recent decades should indicate that the gov't is illegitimate but by driving it even lower, that might wake up the really brain dead to realize what a farce the entire process is.

  32. @Audacious Epigone
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Haha, thanks, though salvaging my powers of prognostication may not turn out to have been... worth it in the scheme of things!

    One thing important to remember--Harris is owned by Silicon Valley. She outraised the rest of the Democrat primary among the tech giants. That's going to get lost in the discussion about her being a "cop", having slept her way up the chain, the clips of her attacking Biden during the debates, etc. But Big Tech knows they can rig this election forty ways from Sunday and as long as Biden wins, it'll be consequence-free election interference.

    Replies: @iffen

    Black voters emphatically rejected Harris as a nominee for president, maybe that will spill over into lack of enthusiasm for her as vice-president.

  33. @Kratoklastes
    @RoatanBill


    If you want to increase voter participation, just put None of the above on every ballot.

    Should None of the above win the election, then whatever that office represents, stays vacant for the natural duration of that election cycle.

     

    The second sentence is where the problem arises.

    There are jurisdictions in the US where some elections do have NOTA (or its equivalent) on the ballot.

    NOTA has won on occasion - e.g., a 1976 Nevada Republican primary, and the 2014 Democratic gubernatorial primary in the same state. All that happens is the next-in-line is declared the winner.

    The fuckbags of the political class will never - so long as their arse points to the ground - permit the peons to say "We don't need any of you" and make it stick.

    If they permitted it to happen, the peons would discover that having an empty political position is objectively better than having the position occupied by the type of parasitic shitbag who is attracted to politics.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    If there are jurisdictions that have a NOTA on the ballot and that crystal clear will of the voters is ignored with the 2nd place POS getting the nod, then what does that say about the sanctity of the voting process?

    And some people insist on voting. All they’re doing is reinforcing a corrupt system; corrupt to the bone.

    Don’t vote. It encourages bad behavior.

    Let’s see if we can drive down the percentage of the voting population to single digits and then watch as the political class tries to make any election a mandate for their always asinine policies. The low rate in recent decades should indicate that the gov’t is illegitimate but by driving it even lower, that might wake up the really brain dead to realize what a farce the entire process is.

  34. @Achmed E. Newman
    We are talking about the political party primaries here, not the general election for President, Reps, and Senators, as specified by the Constitution. I really don't see any problem with this (and you all ought to know by now, I'm an anti-immigration-invasion fanatic).

    After all, there used to be guys in smoke-filled rooms, and silly straw polls with all kinds of rules, that decided who would be the candidate. It was only a few years ago that I realized "hey, this stuff is run like a Federal election, yet it's not." When did it become run by the same organizations that run the real voting? I say that because primary votes are a party function, which are entities not even mentioned in the Constitution (the Founders found political parties an anathema, but they came into being pretty quickly anyway). These elections shouldn't even be run with our tax money. The R's and D's and whomever else ought to pay for it.

    If the R's want to limit voting to only men with property, can they not legally do that? The D's can let Jose, Hose-B, and 32 flavors of gender and specie vote for all I care. The Constitutional amendments XIV, XIX, and XXVI do not apply.

    Replies: @Barack Obama's secret Unz account, @Louis Renault, @Hypnotoad666

    The fact that the data happens to come from a survey about primary elections is probably a red herring. The issue is the extent to which non-citizens are systematically casting illegal votes — and doing so in favor of Democrats.

    If .7% is the number of survey respondents who actually admit to casting an illegal vote, I’d wager the real number is a good bit higher. Suppose half of illegal foreign voters decline to fess up on the survey. And suppose foreigners are also twice as likely to vote in the general as opposed to primary elections, which doesn’t seem implausible since primaries tend to low-turnout affairs dominated by long-term local voters and professional politicos.

    It could be the real number of illegal foreign voters in the presidential/general election might be more like 3%. With a 75% Dem skew, that could add a 2+% margin to Dem. vote totals, which could easily swing a key state somewhere and/or make the difference in who wins the popular vote.

  35. The fact that the data happens to come from a survey about primary elections is probably a red herring.

    That’s what the graphs are about up in the post, hence that’s what I’m writing about. If the on-line conversation here switches to the general election, then people ought to explain that that’s what they are referring to.

    I agree that both the counting of illegal aliens in the census and the “allowing” of them to vote in the general elections can swing the vote, and yes, I also agree that it will swing things toward the Blue squad. (I have no illusions that these 30,000,000 people lean toward Ron Paul style Constitutionalism!) However, just like the former (census) taking does not have a specific “citizen” clause, even less specified are the rules for primary voting. As I wrote numerous times already, there don’t have to even BE elections of the sort we see now, and the voting could be limited to whomever the party desires.

    If this survey is supposed to represent the same number in the general election, well it should SAY SO. Then we are arguing about the motor-voter laws (I’m against ’em), and maybe just the idea that we need to deport 30,000,000 people that shouldn’t be here. And before I get any shit from logistically-challenged Fred Reed about it, NO, we don’t need enough buses to deport everyone on ONE FREAKING DAY!

  36. That’s just one of the reasons the Democrats want Open Borders and oppose the Border Fence/Wall it blocks out their voters and supporters

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS